Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Wolf

BigNorseWolf's page

RPG Superstar 2014 Dedicated Voter. FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 21,826 posts (22,716 including aliases). 14 reviews. 4 lists. No wishlists. 24 Pathfinder Society characters. 3 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 21,826 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

Scavion wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:


Trying out a kitsune UC rogue with an elven branched spear: Gets dex X 1.5 damage at level 3.
Was the 1.5x dex ever clarified?

Yes. fastest faq ever.

Shadow Lodge

Looking at the class i'm not sure how you're "supposed" to play it. For the test i made the exact "horror" this thread was worried about but a standard action at the start of every comobat is way too precious to give up for his dex Kurki. He's going to have to get slashing grace or something similar.

Shadow Lodge

Religion AND family?

Nope. Your standard issue 10 foot pole does not cover this.

This is a haunt. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 gp, do not attempt to resolve the situation just RUN

Shadow Lodge

I could have sworn they clarified this as yes. Stephen Macfarley I think... will dig more tomorrow.

Until then just invisibly sneak up behind people and whisper sweet nothings in their ear.

Shadow Lodge ***

Two ply?

Stats skills ac hp saves CMD Feats race class level archtypes class choices

Shadow Lodge

Insain Dragoon wrote:


Or the fact that you're able to use an area control build that would be ineffective on a dex build.

Trying out a kitsune UC rogue with an elven branched spear: Gets dex X 1.5 damage at level 3.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM Beckett wrote:
Or, by all means, present your own. There are plenty of ways to be much more optimized. That wasn't really the point I was making, as it goes both ways.

The point that I think you missed in your comparison is that fighting with one weapon is such a sub optimal fighting style in this system that the boost you're complaining about is needed just to get on part with fighting with a two handed weapon: which is really what you should be comparing a swashbuckler or other fency type with.

Shadow Lodge

bbangerter wrote:


Not quite. The rules tell us that is how it works, yet it doesn't actually work that way.

Trying to say that what the rules say is not what the rules say is a tall order. This... falls very very short of that standard.

Quote:
Example 1: I am 10' away from you, you have a melee weapon in hand that does not have reach. I run past you, ending up 10' on the other side of you.

No.

What happens is you attempt to move past him. You move individually from one square to another.

Once you enter his threatened square and then ATTEMPT to leave it, you provoke an AoO. That AoO may stop your intended action any numbers of ways: including being tripped or even decapitated.

Quote:
Does the AoO go off before my triggering action? No, it can't, I'm out of your reach at that point in time. It goes off when I leave a threatened square - which is in the middle of my actual action.

What you've done is grouped a series of events together and labeled them collectively as the triggering action when that is not how the game works. The triggering action is you leaving a square, not the composite action of "running past him". A thing is not the same as all of its parts.

The rules still say what the rules still say.

Shadow Lodge

Milo v3 wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Not that I saw. Was there an official statement on it?

There doesn't need to be an offical statement on it:

CRB wrote:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.

The first sentence states that you cannot use stealth while observed. The rest of the paragraph describes methods on how you can make yourself count as unobserved.

But either way, I personally would rule that 5 ft. is a form of movement, thus it is movement. Still, wouldn't be surprised if it was FAQ'd otherwise to stop the issue Claxon mentioned previously.

That says the exact opposite. It very clearly says that both cover or concealment and non observed status are required. You could try to read one sentence without the others in the paragraph, but that interpretation would bring up the question of why anyone would ever try to make the bluff check to hide, get to cover, AND take a -10 on their stealth check if all one had to do was get to cover. It also makes a direct contradiction with the first sentence, which would be meaningless.

Shadow dancer HIPS gives you cover and unobserved. Ranger HIPS gives you concealment but not unobserved: but the lower level ability camoflauge has observation covered. Rogue HIPS was supposed to give you both, but because it copied the ranger HIPS it technically does not (trying to find SKR's statement that it was supposed to)

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This now takes a standard action to work for 1 minute (ie, one combat). Hardly something you're going to want to do all the time.

Slashing grace and a buckler though , along with your dex belt, and you're good.

Shadow Lodge

Milo v3 wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Although, I should mention that it's not as big a problem with Hide In Plain Sight since most version of it don't allow you to negate the need for cover, only the need to be unobserved (which would otherwise normally require a bluff check to distract the enemy once engaged in combat).
Come on... I thought the board had finished with this.... Hide in plainsight removes the need to be unobserved, which is the only reason why you need cover in the first place. Getting cover is listed as the general method of making the character unobserved.

I remember that being RAI that never made it to raw for a lot of the various HIPS abilities but I can't find the citation i was looking for.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dex to ac is also limited by the armor you wear, so dex has to add about 5 points to ac before it starts breaking even.

Shadow Lodge

I'd say no, Its very much like combat.

Shadow Lodge

re the heretic: that's what i was thinking... pretty non ability.

Shadow Lodge

5 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Does a 5 foot step count as movement for a stealth check?

Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

Yes: Movements movement and its not an action.

No: the game means movement like a move action. Sniping would be kind of pointless if you could just 5 foot step stealth.

Usually this comes up for roguey types with hide in plain sight or hellcat stealth who want to sneak attack step and sneak attack again.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

What kind of action is it to make a distraction to hide?

Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you.

-Standard.

As there's no listed action it defaults to standard.

The Heretic inquisitor has it as a move action as a special ability, implying that its at least a standard but it would be pretty useless as a full round action.

So how i think this should work.

Standard action LOOK! A MONKEY!

Bluff vs Sense motive

Move to cover or concealment

Stealth check at -10 because you have to move fast Vs Perception.

*poof*

Maybe stealth needs a blog....

Shadow Lodge

Chengar Qordath wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
I feel it's not so much as PFS making them change this time and more of a developers want it to be a legal option for it and decided to change stuff.
That is a distinction without a difference.
Agreed. The end result is still PFS saying "we don't like this" and the devs changing it.

Well, if PFS is saying that its saying that with a whole lot of playtesting. If you and your DM like the old version nothing is stopping you from keeping it, but its not all that unlikely that your DM and a lot of other DMs were either getting their bad guys stymied by it or raised the power level of the encounters to deal with it, possibly stomping the rest of the table who didn't have it.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brew Bird wrote:

I think it might have more to do with the fact that Strengh based characters seem kind of pointless when it's so easy to get Dex to damage.

The way I see it, there are two main ways to play a melee character, high Str, which gives you more damage/attack, or High Dex w/ TWF, which gives you a bit more maneuverability and more attacks, but less damage.

Funnily enough, I seem to recall this exact sentiment being very common on these boards when people first learned of slashing grace. Everyone was worried Dex to damage was going to be OP. Now we're complaining when Paizo nerfs it accordingly.

That's just my two cp though, I don't speak from a position of much experience outside a few years of home games.

Dex to damage is a build or feat sponge. The option there is to have really good feat chains that make not taking it to really make it a trade off. Vital strike or dex to damage isn't going to tempt anyone.

Shadow Lodge

Insain Dragoon wrote:
I think they wanted Swashbuckler to have some sort of unique trick that no one else had, but incorrectly chose Patty/riposte over Precise Strike.

Why on earth would you ever use precise strike for level to damage when you can use parry/riposte for weapon and dex and level to damage? I suppose if you're fighting a caster, but thats about it.

Shadow Lodge ***

Eeeexcelent. That will be a nice doldrom to get the lowbies over in a few weeks...

Shadow Lodge ***

Did they ever figure out if this can go on just a level 7 or a 6 7 or 8 ?

Shadow Lodge Dedicated Voter 2014

Thomas LeBlanc wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I promise i'll add something to the reject pile this year!
Just shoot it by me first and I will do a quick pass if you want BNW. It would be a shame if I had to add your item to the list of items I have reported for DQ. I think I am almost to 70 items over the last 3 years...

I usually see them after the cull so not THAT reject pile.

Shadow Lodge Dedicated Voter 2014

I promise i'll add something to the reject pile this year!

Shadow Lodge ***

Bryce Kineman wrote:

Archives of Nethys is basing its price off the post i was referring too.

Here, That aside Nethys is NOT a go to source for whats proper or not. These Forums and Additional resources are, But this system is fundamentally flawed in the fact that most rulings on things like Luthier's Rapier are scattered across years of Blog post's and Message board responses by the Dev's. While they do an excellent Job of eventually FAQ'ing the Important stuff. things like this slip through the cracks and are ignored by those who will abuse the rules. I'm only asking for Further Clarity. Someone who will say NO, and people will listen because they aren't simply in the "art" department or something like that.

I DID tell them that he needs to be listened too and that the Price IS 25,020 because he said it was a typo but they wont listen because he's not an Editor or the like.

and again, archives of nethys shows why its not only as good but a better source than the printed material.

Shadow Lodge ***

Grats!

Shadow Lodge

Mead Gregorisson wrote:

Rather posting a link like that, are there any actual other ideas being thrown out? Big government, small government... what is the way to fix things? Or is everything fine now? What's the verdict?

BigNorseWolf wrote:

but.. but.. just shrink government solves every problem!

The verdict is that 4% of the population got one word crossed out for marriage laws to accomidate a desire that is fundamental to the very core of their being. Less than 1% of the population is NOT getting an entire shelf of law books written to accommodate a personal desire. Its not happening.

By all means, push for it to be decriminalized, but you're going to have to go to a lawyer and write up your own contract for how the heck that works.

Shadow Lodge

Wild empathy is the go to ability for doing that.

Many of my characters also buy a 3 gp pig in a bag of holding and drop it on the ground for carnivores.

They work well together, since the pig should buy you at least enough time for the wild empathy check to kick in, if you don't have fast empathy.

Shadow Lodge

but.. but.. just shrink government solves every problem!

Shadow Lodge ***

This is more home brew than pfs. An eidolon (or even animal companions) personality isn't something that a DM can really play and take over without knowing the animal companion , which is hard when you keep switching Dms.

And by the rules the handle animal rules provide very little limit on a characters ability to control their pet if the player knows what they're doing.

Shadow Lodge ***

captnchuck67 wrote:
Total anarchy and confusion. People are prone to "fudging" as is. I think the rules should be stricter

For rebuilds? Why? Its ridiculous to expect people to know what paizo is going to change their mind on.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Reading it: Very dense, legalistic. Forget seeing forest for the trees the writing has you concentrating on bark and you have to pan out from there to see how the classes work and get a reasonable picture of what it does.

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Yeah, without getting too bashy (the Society isn't exactly my thing)

Still works!

ow ow ow ow ow watch the tail.

Shadow Lodge

Mandy H. wrote:
Being 'different from standard' seems sufficient reason to include asexuality/aromanticism in the category to me. .

I dunno. That seems like a nascar fan and a Cricket aficionado getting together to discuss how much they don't like baseball.

Shadow Lodge

TheJeff wrote:
So basically, because Medieval Europe had these prejudices, they're the default in fantasy settings. Medieval Europe also horribly limited your roles in society by gender and by class and birth. Somehow that's not nearly so strongly the default in fantasy settings. Possibly because prejudice against LGTBQ is still common in our society?

Thats a heck of a leap of logic.

A woman warrior overcoming society's prejudice and proving their worth a la joan of arc or mulan is a very common story: so much so that even the barbarian iconic has it as a back story despite most of golarion being almost gender neutral. So yes, in most fantasy settings the gender role is there.

Class is a little different. Because mid adventurer automatically equals wearing the GDP of a small duchy they're effectively outside of the class structure.

You will occasionally see an uppity noble, or have a noble that needs to be taken alive rather than murderated because doing so would cause too many problems.

Quote:
It's hard to get rid of once it exists, but it's far from inevitable.

How nevitable is it though?

Quote:
In fact, many of the known examples of groups with "third gender" roles and the like are just the sort of small tribes you're asserting are least likely to accept.

How many of those small tribes are there though?

Perhaps its a form of birth control? Where the population has leveled out? Until that happens its discouraged, once you've hit the population your area will support with your current tec level your society starts endorsing or at least tolerating it?

Shadow Lodge ***

Mulgar wrote:


And trust me, you don't want to give me a reason to be a more of a munchkin.

And don't pour that bucket of water into the Atlantic. :)

Shadow Lodge

TheJeff wrote:
If it was that simple, it would be universal. And yet, there are societies that have and have had far less prejudice against LGBTQs than the medieval or even modern West.

Medieval Europe is the culture most people are familiar with, and the one usually associated with fantasy role playing games. If you have something like medieval Europe in one respect, people are probably going to use that as a guideline.

That things like third gender are accepted doesn't mean that they're universally accepted or that there's no prejudice towards them in their society.

Quote:
Another difference for LGBTQ people is that if they're not hiding and closeted, they're not that "Other". They're people just like you that you can get to know and like before realizing they're different.

You need a large population with a lot of exposure for this to work. We're JUST getting there in the modern west with the aid of television. If your entire monkeysphere consists of the 1,000 people in your city you're not going to know enough of a minority to really bring them into the tribe.

Quote:
They could be your brother or sister, your daughter or son, your childhood friend or your nice co-worker. That's a large part of how prejudice is fading in the modern world - not through some enlightenment or uniquely modern viewpoint, but by the old fashioned tribal process of knowing people.

Could be, but if you only know a few dozen people it probably won't be, especially if there's a greater tendency to keep it under wraps. They might be there, but you don't know about it. And because they can't act on it , you don't know about it, which keeps familiarity from happening.

Quote:
Beyond that, in a fantasy world, if we have many different intelligent races and we can decide that we can overlook the predisposition to hate and fear difference there so that we can have a more fun game where such different creatures can interact without constant war and hatred, why do we have to keep this prejudice?

I don't think it NEEDS to be kept, but singling it out for exclusion is something you'd actively have to do rather than just assuming it would automatically be tossed.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Qaianna wrote:


The question becomes 'Why is it considered taboo?'.

Because its different than most of the people around you.

Its different because your DNA has a vested interest in reproducing. which oddly enough involves encouraging you to find and attract a mate mates of the opposite sex.

This produces a vast majority of people who are physically male, act like men, and attracted to women and physically women who act like women and are attracted to men.

If you don't fit in that mold then you stand out.

If you stand out, you are not one of us. One of us. One of us humans are tribal little monkeys apes prone to forming groups and killing the dreaded other. If you're not in the tribe you're part of the other.

Quote:
It came from somewhere. And prejudices can change over time. Look at some of the US's history regarding certain immigrant groups and how acceptable they were. And don't forget the power of demagogues to stir things up in their own view.

Prejudice tends to die down quickly when you can't tell members of a group from anyone else: hence why prejudice against the Irish vanished after a few generations: they look talk and act just like everyone else.

Quote:
Trying to claim such a thing is a default IS a position that's being forced on a setting.

I don't think its being forced on the setting. I think its the authors/dm having people act like people and unfortunately our reference pool for how people act is... pretty horrible.

On the other hand, its perfectly reasonable to say that in a world filled with dragons elves dwarves and roaving monsters humans have their sociopathic group forming tendencies channeled elsewhere...

Or its entirely possible that the level of danger presented by the world produces societies that NEED to reproduce like rabbits in order to maintain the red shirt population, leading to even stricter gender roles (because you can lose half the men and not lose one whit of reproductive ability) and more encouragement of male/female pairings.

Shadow Lodge ***

Grats!

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unless its a gelatinous cube, a human in a colossal creatures space is not a solid body: there's more than enough room for both of you (pathfinder, blasphemously, says there's never room for jello)

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Every version of fenris /fenrir is usually taken.

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Boomer the Mad wrote:


  • collar of obedience,

  • Ok, I have to ask why this one...

    Shadow Lodge

    2 people marked this as a favorite.

    The best guide I can use for a society is history, and different histories.

    A big problem is that a lot of gender studies looking into the matter do so with a tabula rasa/all nurture no nature view of humanity that I find bafflingly unrealistic.

    Societies come up with the social mores that they have for a reason. They tend to far outlive whatever usefulness they may have, but very few social institutions pop up just because. It doesn't make them right but it does make them likely.

    Shadow Lodge

    Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
    xeose4 wrote:
    Or the too-common storyline where the male main character never once has an emotional connection with any male companions and doesn't bat an eye when a male character he'd been adventuring with for years gets hurt or killed, because then he wouldn't be a "real man" (since real men don't have emotions).
    OK, I'd like to know what you've been reading because this bears little resemblance to what I've read, with the possible exceptions of Howard, Lovecraft and Eddison.

    NCIS?

    Shadow Lodge ***

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    LazarX wrote:
    GM Lamplighter wrote:
    "Your DM" is Mike Brock and John Compton, though, and they are at GenCon right now.
    Only Mr. Compton after GenCon until Brock's successor is crowned.

    and then recovers consciousness.

    Shadow Lodge ***

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    theshoveller wrote:
    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    theshoveller wrote:

    Duly noted.

    Where are the other four?

    At the start of the dungeon trying to grease their mounts through a hole.
    Lads, that's not how 'Handle Animal' is supposed to work...

    It was in the pathfinder instruction booklet sir

    Shadow Lodge

    Icyshadow wrote:


    Try selling a setting full of asexuals. That's even less likely to fly.

    Its really different from most peoples experiences. To most people not having those desires at all would make someone almost a different species. (despite the fact that they should remember a time in their life when they did feel that way)

    Its hard to demonstrate a lack of something.\: show rather than tell (is rocket raccoon asexual or just not seeing any comparable females? Story wise they look exactly the same)

    It removes a lot of possible character motivations.

    Setting wise... why are there still people? Cloning? People doing it anyway? How did the planet wind up that way etc.

    Quote:
    Why? Because some circles would either say they don't exist, or that they aren't part of LGBT.

    I don't think it fits in the catagory that well. Other than being different from "standard" there's not much in common. (LG is a lot closer to hetero than asexual is to either)

    The lack of a need to congregate or find each other also renders us pretty much invisible. Hard for people to be riled up about things that they don't know exist.

    Shadow Lodge ***

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    theshoveller wrote:

    Duly noted.

    Where are the other four?

    At the start of the dungeon trying to grease their mounts through a hole.

    Shadow Lodge

    Do PDFs update with the errata?

    Shadow Lodge

    A glass terrarium or wall of force in between the monster and the rogue would be an unusual situation.

    Stealth is THE ususal situation for making a perception check to spot a creature.

    Shadow Lodge

    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Chris Lambertz wrote:

    To take this in a slightly different direction, I have some questions for you guys from purely a site structure/community team standpoint:

    - Does having more accessible and visible introductions to our new design/development staff sound like something you want? (Either through our blog via tags or maybe our contact page?) Is there something we can do to the forums themselves to make employees more visible?

    It might cut down on the desire for bloodshed unrestrained grar if there's a face to go along with it.

    Might.

    - How would you prefer to see new FAQs communicated to the community? Is that in the form of a blog series, or is it a series of threads?

    One. Page. Dear gods one page.

    I have no idea where half of the faq's are. They're stored on individual books, and not always on the book you'd think they would be. The FAQ on altering class features for archetypes is on the core rule book... which doesn't even deal with archtypes.

    I'd like to see why things were changed. A lot of the recent errata has been "wth?" levels of why something changed. If one ability was causing the need for a nerf to the bonus class abilities.. change that ability, not the entire class.

    The "this paragraph this sentence replace this.. on that page on this sentence replace that..." format is great for an editor, but as a player it gives me NO idea what i'm looking at unless i can put two things up on my screen at the same time and pen something in, cross something out, and then read it.

    - Knowing how we've handled errata up until now, what would you change? If it's a blog, what general information would you like to see us include?

    Quote:
    - Let's assume the PRD is a blank slate and we can have any unicorn we want, how would you invision errata being notated here?

    I like how pfsrd does it: you have the real text, the old text is there with a strike through through it.

    Quote:
    - Are versioned PDFs a thing you'd use and want?

    Still dealing with that new fangled fire thing. Not my area of expertise.

    1 to 50 of 21,826 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

    ©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.